Android

But the iPhone and iPad aren't priced at a premium.<p>Anyway, it's a mistake pit Google against Apple. The real battle will be between Google and Microsoft for the exact same hardware manufacturers and sales channels. (Meanwhile, you can buy an iPad from an Apple Store or from Walmart without any carrier involvement).<p>Google hasn't managed the fragmentation problem very well, they haven't done enough to control the quality the Android OS between carriers and manufacturers, and they've utterly mismanaged the Android Market. I'm no fan of Microsoft or WinMo 7, but I expect Microsoft to do a much better job at addressing all of those issues.<p>Microsoft can also leverage their Zune desktop software.<p>And Microsoft's development tools are generally very popular with developers. I've done some work with WPF and I found it very impressive and I would expect their Phone SDK to be of similar quality. On the other hand, even though I generally like Java I'm finding the move from iPhone development to Android development to be a depressing step backwards both in terms of the dev tools and especially the SDK.<p>Then again, it is Microsoft we're talking about. It may take them another 3 or 6 years to get it right.

<p><pre><code> Windows lacked the fit and finish of the Macintosh. But it didn't matter. Because there were hundreds of Windows machines whereas there was only a few variations of Macintosh, all controlled by the same company and priced at a premium. </code></pre> Windows is priced at a premium, you just don't feel it because the cost is rolled into the cost of whatever piece of kit you just bought. Is our memory so shallow as to forget the anti-trust methods that brought Windows to dominance? It wasn't because the market wanted it, it was because that's what was crammed down the throat of the market.<p><pre><code> And the most recent Android Foursquare build has finally delivered the awesome Foursquare iPhone experience to Android. </code></pre> That line sort of says it all, doesn't it? How many times have you heard that the other way? "delivered the awesome Android experience to the iPhone" - yeah probably never.<p>I'm just bitter because I've been working on a html5 version of my site specifically for Android, and it's a major PITA. The 4 android phones I have all behave differently, the different OS versions have their own quirks and bugs. And the hardware, god the hardware! Awful.

I know of no Android tablet available in the $199 price range. Someone please point one out if one exists.<p>The argument that Windows won because Macintosh was priced at a premium is a dubious argument.<p>Apple is able to purchase flash memory, processors, and touch screens in bulk. They own Intrinisty and PA Semiconductor.<p>Apple looks like Walmart on their supply side and looks like Barney's on the retail side. There is no price pressure. They could slash their margins but they don't have to. It's still difficult to find an iPad and iPhone 4. They can't make enough of them.<p>Secondly, 95% market share is unnatural. It doesn't happen often. Markets look more like GM/Chrysler/Ford or XBox/PlayStation/Wii. I suspect the smartphone market will develop similarly.<p>And if you want to say that the iPhone will be crushed like the Macintosh was crushed by Windows then it is just as easy to say that Android will be crushed the same way Sun Microsystems and Novell were crushed when Eric Schmidt was there.

I find it interesting that most people who like Android like it in the future tense.<p>Android is always great, but in that next version, that is just around the corner. That upcoming tablet, that upcoming phone, that upcoming software.

I hate when people cheer lead for one particular gigantic corporation to <i>own the market</i> History shows that isn't very good for consumers. Why not cheer lead for a healthy diverse market with lots of competition?

One thing I'd like to see is Android have more of a presence in universities. It'd give CS students useful exposure to mobile development and allow them to put all of the Java that gets crammed down their throats to good use.

<i>Because there were hundreds of Windows machines whereas there was only a few variations of Macintosh, all controlled by the same company and priced at a premium.</i><p>By this formula, one ought to have been bullish about PlaysForSure--a platform with over a dozen music stores and compatible player devices from almost two dozen vendors. But we saw what happened there: the platform was beaten by a single store with a few variations of player all controlled by the same company and priced at a premium.<p>Neither example is strongly predictive, but I think this one is a bit more relevant, for reasons which should be obvious.

<p><pre><code> Windows lacked the fit and finish of the Macintosh. But it didn't matter. Because there were hundreds of Windows machines whereas there was only a few variations of Macintosh... </code></pre> This has long been the conventional wisdom, but given recent history, I'm less and less convinced that it's true. There's a myriad of other factors to consider, like hardware decisions, marketing strategies, and much more.<p>It's really quite imprudent to bet on Android for only that reason.

The one thing I really don't get about this type of article is the predictions based on a management team that isn't at the company. Apple's current management team was behind the iPod strategy and inherited an already niche market with the Macintosh. I don't look to the actions of Thomas Edison to determine what GE next strategy will be.<p>With the iPod they started with a "high" price and introduced models that filled in the low-end. They also built and ecosystem around it.<p>Also, this "there-can-be-only-one" crud doesn't really happen in many markets.

I use a Nexus One as my daily phone since it came out in January, and it's hard to say whether Android software/hardware experience will ever catch up to Apple's standard.<p>The touchscreen on the iPhone is state of the art, with my N1, I need to touch something once or twice, which never happens with iPhone.<p>Same for keyboard on the iPhone, it's light years better than any of the dozens implementations for Android. I don't care for predictive text so much as just a great spell checker.<p>Also compare the Facebook app on both phones. Android's is not there yet.

What Android tablet is he talking about? I don't know any comparable to the iPad.

We discussed this before... but... what if Microsoft developer tools are better than Apple (xcode) and Android (eclipse) ? what if any guy can develop some software in a few days while doing the same for Android and the Apple takes 2x o 3x? what if Silverlight experience is better than html5 or native UIs? And... what if connecting games between desktop, xbox and mobile works?<p>Many "What IFs", but for me the developing tools and silverlight are key. Also on the RIM side QNX is a very promising bet against Linux/iOS/Windows, the demo doesn't feel real, but QNX is a strong OS.

I've heard the "fit and finish" argument frequently, both in print and in person as the owner of an HTC Incredible. I don't really see it myself, though. Sure there are a lot of junky looking 3rd party apps, but this is true of iPhone as well. Unlike early Windows vs Mac, I don't have this reaction to the base system.<p>What are people reacting to when they say this? Or is it just a canned response?

It's already massively outselling the iPhone. Do we even need to speculate that it's going to be an important platform for a long time?

Ever since "losing" to Microsoft on the desktop, Apple have slowly perfected their strategy for being the smaller alternative. They find the most lucrative niche and design to the point where they can own that piece of the market. Built into Apple products is a sense of superiority, the feeling that the rest of the world is jealous and frustrated. It's in their ads, and its in their users. This has shown its effectiveness in the computer market, and it will probably make them a ton of money on the mobile scene as well.<p>But Apple didn't have to do this in the mobile world. The iPhone was the default smartphone. I was once talking with a rather avid iPhone user who he asked me "what's the market for Android?" I fina;ly convinced him that it could be everyone when I replied, "what's the market for Windows?"<p>The iPhone is a product. It has a target niche, a company behind it, a list of features, and everything else one expects. Android is not - it's a platform. The Droid is a product. The Nexus one is a different product. Like Windows, Android twists and bends to the offerings of each vendor. Android has the more scalable long tail strategy - instead of trying to please your customers directly, let the market mold your product into as many forms as it will pay for.<p>I don't think that Apple have necessarily screwed up. They may have given up the big fish, and they may have had a reason. For one, Apple are doing what they're best at. They also may have a strategy that integrates with the Mac. They may also be right. Maybe the mobile phone isn't the next computer. Maybe it's like the iPod, best at doing one thing very well.<p>I think Apple is making a mistake in breaking developer trust. As long as they keep market dominance, people will keep coming back to them, but as the numbers show, Android is poised to surpass. When there are many more Androids out there than iPhones, iPhone dev is gonna be a tough sell.

<i>"When he told me his primary uses of the tablet will be Google Docs, Gmail, and Google Calendar, I told him he'll be better off with Android."</i><p>Or Chrome OS, if it ever ships.

An interesting thing that comes out in a lot of these topics is how people are historical determinists when it come to tech platforms.<p>"The way OS wars work is..."<p>To me it seems like so much is different that I'd be very hesitant to have such a strong opinion. The players are established companies, it's phones and tablets (cheaper devices with shorter lives), the web is the killer app, software development is easier (in many ways), it's twenty years later....

I have been debating fiddling wither win7 or android.<p>What is a good android phone to test/develop with? Is the nexus still the best choice?

It's inevitable that the mobile phone backed by the cloud is going to take the place of the Personal Computer. A pocket sized device will <i>be</i> your personal computer. Larger form factors will only exist to provide input and display facilities that can't live in the pocket-sized one.

Five years ago I think I had some Samsung phone, maybe; I don't remember for sure. Or that might have been the year that I first got a Palm Treo. I went through three Palm Treos because they kept failing.<p>Maybe the iPhone, or Android, or both, will still be with us long-term. Maybe not. I don't really get majorly attached to my mobile phone; if the iPhone isn't the most totally awesomest phone for me next time I get a new one, then maybe I'll get something else, and leave the iPhone as a distant memory, along with the Samsungs, and the Motorolas, and the pile of defunct Palm Treos. (For that matter, I already have my original iPhone stuffed away somewhere, while my shiny new iPhone 4 is in active use...)

wow<p>great conversation<p>i am just seeing this now<p>i wish disqus could pick up this entire discussion and post it into the comments on my blog<p>it would greatly enrich the conversation there and i would be able to engage in real time, not a day later

I've noticed that too, that Google seems to have created the Windows of mobile phones, while Apple, of course, is the Apple of mobile phones.<p>So, where does that leave Microsoft?

I keep putting off doing anything on android because of java. I don't know java, and I don't really want to learn it. I suppose I will give in eventually, for android, but it will be grudgingly.

This article by Fred Wilson (AVC) highlights the rise of Android and ARM as the dominant players (and standard) in the next wave of computing (along with Apple and others as strong niche players).<p>For the last several decades, the Wintel standard has dominated personal computing (PC). If we look at current market share data, Microsoft’s and Intel’s position in the PC market appears unassailable. As of September 2010, the Windows OS controlled 91% of the PC market (Net Applications, 2010), while Intel microprocessors controlled just over 80% (IDC, 2010).<p>But what if personal computing is shifting away from desktops and packaged applications, the stronghold of Windows and Intel, to a combination of “thin devices,” cloud computing, and online media? Thin devices are smartphones, tablets, connected televisions, and a myriad of other devices that connect to the cloud to access various online media, from video to social networking.<p>In view of this transition, the future actually looks quite bleak for Microsoft and Intel, despite their strong position in the PC market. Microsoft has struggled mightily in the smartphone and online media markets, and is reluctant to aggressively enter the cloud in fear that it will cannibalize sales of Windows and Office. Meanwhile Intel has struggled to produce microprocessors that appeal to thin device OEMs, where energy efficiency is prioritized over sheer computing power.<p>If Microsoft and Intel, and the Wintel standard are fading, then which companies and which standards are rising? Apple has been pushing the frontier in computing with its collection of thin devices (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad, the Apple TV) and its media platforms (iTunes and the App Store). Google has also invested substantially in these new computing markets with Android on thin devices (smartphones, tablets, smartbooks, set-top boxes, and connected televisions) and Google’s growing suite of cloud services (e.g., Gmail, Maps, YouTube, Android Market).<p>Looking at current trends, it appears that the diffusion of Android and ARM may be accelerating past competitors. Recent NPD and Nielsen data indicate that Android sales have now overtaken Apple’s iOS and Blackberry’s RIM in the smartphone market. And analyst Paul Morland of KBC Peel Hunt estimates ARM’s market share in microprocessors will increase from 29% to 40% from 2010-2014. Meanwhile Android and ARM are on the cusp of rising in emerging device markets, such as tablets and connected televisions.<p>If the last several decades of personal computing was dominated by the Wintel standard, with AMD and Apple as the scrappy competitors. It appears the future of computing may be dominated by Armdroid (or a slight variant based on the Google Chrome OS), with Apple and several others as strong niche players. Of course there will be other companies that will rise and sustain their position as dominant players in other segments of computing, from enterprise cloud services (e.g., Salesforce.com) to online video (e.g., Netflix), and online retail (e.g., Amazon).<p>I just posted this to my blog and submitted the post to HN. If you enjoyed the read, I'd appreciate an upvote (the article title is "Armdroid"). Thanks!

Android phones, tablets, netbooks.<p>Great choice of prices and features.<p>Multiple hardware vendors.<p>Open and friendly development ecosystem.<p>Open market without one gatekeeper.<p>Sales numbers accelerating month by month.<p>It looks like the game is over. The winner is Android.